Jump To » Mobile / Confirm Them / Right Shelf / Sports / State Blogs / About / Contact / Help / Posting Rules / Conservative Book Club / Human Events
Know The Evil You Are Dealing With
By Erick Posted in Law — Comments (30) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Let's not dance around the niceties of sterile language. The left, once Gonzales v. Carhart came out proclaimed simply that a method of abortion had been prohibited by the Supreme Court. Actually, the elected representatives of the people in the United States Congress overwhelmingly passed the ban and the Supreme Court simply said it was constitutional.
The left will not call it "partial birth abortion." The prefer to talk of "fetuses" and "intact dilation and extraction." Sterile language for a sterile procedure. In fact, what "intact dilation and extraction" means is that the fetus, usually at a point where it is a he or a she and capable of living as a child outside the womb, is partially extracted from the mother's womb only to have his or her skull smashed and brains sucked out. The child is partially born and then killed.
Justice Kennedy, writing for the Court, used the words of a doctor and of a nurse to provide a full description. Click below the fold to read it. And you should.
The abortion procedure that was the impetus for thenumerous bans on “partial-birth abortion,” including the Act, is a variation of this standard D&E. See M. Haskell, Dilation and Extraction for Late Second Trimester Abor-tion (1992), 1 Appellant’s App. in No. 04–3379 (CA8), p. 109 (hereinafter Dilation and Extraction). The medical community has not reached unanimity on the appropriate name for this D&E variation. It has been referred to as “intact D&E,” “dilation and extraction” (D&X), and “intactD&X.” Nat. Abortion Federation, supra, at 440, n. 2; see also F. Cunningham et al., Williams Obstetrics 243 (22d ed. 2005) (identifying the procedure as D&X); Danforth’s Obstetrics and Gynecology 567 (J. Scott, R. Gibbs, B. Karlan, & A. Haney eds. 9th ed. 2003) (identifying the procedure as intact D&X); M. Paul, E. Lichtenberg, L. Borgatta, D. Grimes, & P. Stubblefield, A Clinician’sGuide to Medical and Surgical Abortion 136 (1999) (identifying the procedure as intact D&E). For discussion purposes this D&E variation will be referred to as intact D&E. The main difference between the two procedures isthat in intact D&E a doctor extracts the fetus intact or largely intact with only a few passes. There are no comprehensive statistics indicating what percentage of all D&Es are performed in this manner.
Intact D&E, like regular D&E, begins with dilation ofthe cervix. Sufficient dilation is essential for the procedure. To achieve intact extraction some doctors thus mayattempt to dilate the cervix to a greater degree. This approach has been called “serial” dilation. Carhart, supra, at 856, 870, 873; Planned Parenthood, supra, at 965. Doctors who attempt at the outset to perform intact D&E may dilate for two full days or use up to 25 osmotic dilators. See, e.g., Dilation and Extraction 110; Carhart, supra, at 865, 868, 876, 886.
In an intact D&E procedure the doctor extracts the fetusin a way conducive to pulling out its entire body, instead of ripping it apart. One doctor, for example, testified:
“If I know I have good dilation and I reach in and the fetus starts to come out and I think I can accomplish it, the abortion with an intact delivery, then I use my forceps a little bit differently. I don’t close them quite so much, and I just gently draw the tissue out attempting to have an intact delivery, if possible.”App. in No. 05–1382, at 74.
Rotating the fetus as it is being pulled decreases the oddsof dismemberment. Carhart, supra, at 868–869; App. inNo. 05–380, pp. 40–41; 5 Appellant’s App. in No. 04–3379(CA8), p. 1469. A doctor also “may use forceps to grasp afetal part, pull it down, and re-grasp the fetus at a higher level—sometimes using both his hand and a forceps—to exert traction to retrieve the fetus intact until the head is lodged in the [cervix].” Carhart, 331 F. Supp. 2d, at 886–
887.
Intact D&E gained public notoriety when, in 1992, Dr. Martin Haskell gave a presentation describing his method of performing the operation. Dilation and Extraction 110–111. In the usual intact D&E the fetus’ head lodges in the cervix, and dilation is insufficient to allow it to pass. See, e.g., ibid.; App. in No. 05–380, at 577; App. in No. 05–1382, at 74, 282. Haskell explained the next step as follows:
“‘At this point, the right-handed surgeon slides thefingers of the left [hand] along the back of the fetusand “hooks” the shoulders of the fetus with the index and ring fingers (palm down).
“‘While maintaining this tension, lifting the cervix and applying traction to the shoulders with the fingers of the left hand, the surgeon takes a pair of bluntcurved Metzenbaum scissors in the right hand. He carefully advances the tip, curved down, along the spine and under his middle finger until he feels it contact the base of the skull under the tip of his middle finger.
“‘[T]he surgeon then forces the scissors into the base of the skull or into the foramen magnum. Havingsafely entered the skull, he spreads the scissors to enlarge the opening.“‘The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents. With the catheter still in place, he appliestraction to the fetus, removing it completely from the patient.’” H. R. Rep. No. 108–58, p. 3 (2003).
This is an abortion doctor’s clinical description. Here is another description from a nurse who witnessed the same method performed on a 261/2-week fetus and who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee:
“‘Dr. Haskell went in with forceps and grabbed thebaby’s legs and pulled them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby’s body and the arms—everything but the head. The doctor kept the head right inside the uterus. . . .
“‘The baby’s little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out, like a startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he thinks he is going to fall. “‘The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening, and sucked thebaby’s brains out. Now the baby went completely limp. . . . “‘He cut the umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby in a pan, along with theplacenta and the instruments he had just used.’”
Ibid.
Dr. Haskell’s approach is not the only method of killing the fetus once its head lodges in the cervix, and “the process has evolved” since his presentation. Planned Parenthood, 320 F. Supp. 2d, at 965. Another doctor, for example, squeezes the skull after it has been pierced “so that enough brain tissue exudes to allow the head to passthrough.” App. in No. 05–380, at 41; see also Carhart, supra, at 866–867, 874. Still other physicians reach intothe cervix with their forceps and crush the fetus’ skull. Carhart, supra, at 858, 881. Others continue to pull the fetus out of the woman until it disarticulates at the neck, in effect decapitating it. These doctors then grasp the head with forceps, crush it, and remove it. Id., at 864, 878; see also Planned Parenthood, supra, at 965.
Some doctors performing an intact D&E attempt to remove the fetus without collapsing the skull. See Carhart, supra, at 866, 869. Yet one doctor would not allow delivery of a live fetus younger than 24 weeks because “the objective of [his] procedure is to perform an abortion,” not a birth. App. in No. 05–1382, at 408–409. The doctor thus answered in the affirmative when asked whether he would “hold the fetus’ head on the internal side of the [cervix] in order to collapse the skull” and killthe fetus before it is born. Id., at 409; see also Carhart, supra, at 862, 878. Another doctor testified he crushes a fetus’ skull not only to reduce its size but also to ensurethe fetus is dead before it is removed. For the staff to have to deal with a fetus that has “some viability to it, some movement of limbs,” according to this doctor, “[is] always adifficult situation.” App. in No. 05–380, at 94; see Carhart, supra, at 858.
D&E and intact D&E are not the only second-trimesterabortion methods. Doctors also may abort a fetus through medical induction. The doctor medicates the woman to induce labor, and contractions occur to deliver the fetus. Induction, which unlike D&E should occur in a hospital, can last as little as 6 hours but can take longer than 48. It accounts for about five percent of second-trimester abortions before 20 weeks of gestation and 15 percent of those after 20 weeks. Doctors turn to two other methods of second-trimester abortion, hysterotomy and hysterectomy, only in emergency situations because they carry increased risk of complications. In a hysterotomy, as in a cesareansection, the doctor removes the fetus by making an incision through the abdomen and uterine wall to gain accessto the uterine cavity. A hysterectomy requires the removal of the entire uterus. These two procedures represent about .07% of second-trimester abortions. Nat. Abortion Federation, 330 F. Supp. 2d, at 467; Planned Parenthood, supra, at 962–963.
Code words
by rchdmess
I don't consider using the correct medical terms to be "code words". I consider folks making up terms like "partial birth abortion" to be those using code words. I don't like abortion, but I'll use the correct terminology to describe it and then describe the proceedure that the terminology represents. I won't use non-medical terminology to describe a medical proceedure which is intended to make the proceedure more disgusting than it already is.
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to fit facts.
I suppose, that by telling people this week that "I have strep throat," that I've been using a "code word" since I *should* have been saying that I have Streptococcus pyogenes. Clearly, my determination to use such a made-up term has *nothing* to do with wishing to describe a procedure by its commonly-known and more descriptive shorthand, and everything to do with trying to make Streptococcus pyogenes more disgusting than it already is.
Get a life.
------------
[F]or by the fundamental law of Nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred...
-John Locke
Not Analogous
by rchdmess
Doctors call strep throat, strep throat; I know because I've had it. Doctors don't call partial birth abortion, partial birth abortion. The situations are, therefore, not analogous.
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to fit facts. Sherlock Holmes
capital mistakes and data
by haystack
are rather endearing associations. It is a capital mistake to suggest when a murderer kills 32 people and then himself to call it executions and suicide because, well, these are code words. Until we KNOW they were "executed" by the appropriate legal definition for execution, we should just call it what...a terrible tragedy? Some people were shot and killed?
Please. To suggest you educate the populace on an issue (you know, those 300 million of us out here with a sum combined reading skill level of the 8th grade)by using terms they can't even read or comprehend?
Intact Dilation and Extraction means what to someone out there at this reading level?
Partial birth is every bit as true as intact dilation...calling things what they are do a whole lot more to get people up and trying to make sense of a thing, than chasing them away with terms a good number of people don't understand and will therefore not bother giving a second look at.
We could come up with something more "palatable" to remove the temptation for "twisting facts to suit theories"...but where would that leave us exactly in the national debate about whether we should allow the termination of a fetus not yet fully presented at the terminix of the birth canal?
Wow...just wow.
haystack's 12th:
Conservatives (and Presidential Candidates especially) shall offer no aid and comfort to the opposition in times of legislative conflict (and ensuing political campaigns).
OK, we'll stop using "code words" and "made up
by mbecker908
medical terms".
How about we use a legal term? Murder would do very nicely for this particular procedure. You want to avoid capital mistakes? Let's start avoiding capital murder performed on the helpless by women and their doctors for the sake of nothing more than convenience.
You make me sick.
____
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
I don't stoop to insults
by rchdmess
I thought that we were supposed to engage in thoughtful discussion and not lower ourselves to insults. Birth is a life process, so is death. Partial birth makes as much sense, to me anyway, as partial death. I won't insult your use of the term, but, also, won't accept your insults when I refuse to use it.
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to fit facts.
Neither does mbecker
by Leon H Wolf
Nowhere in his comment does he offer an insult toward you. "You make me sick" is an observation (albeit an unpleasant one) about the reaction you provoke in him, but it's not an insult towards you in any way.
You're pretty clearly not interested in actually engaging any points of the discussion here, except to whine about how you're being unfairly treated, so why don't you just move on?
------------
[F]or by the fundamental law of Nature, man being to be preserved as much as possible, when all cannot be preserved, the safety of the innocent is to be preferred...
-John Locke
Sorry
by rchdmess
Sorry, I wasn't trying to make anybody sick, and I do have a life; so I'll move on.
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to fit facts. Sherlock Holmes
You have a life. And the whole point here
by mbecker908
is that you are more than willing to deprive full term babies of theirs. For convenience.
I suppose I'll run across a more shameful course of thought sometime, I'm just really not looking forward to it.
____
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
You are incorrect in your assumptions
by rchdmess
As I stated, in my first post, I am against abortion in all its forms. I am a scientist and like precision in communication. Inaccurate scientific language has brought us the global warming hoax and the banning of DDT to combat malaria. My only point was
about the language used and not about the process itself. Sorry if I wasn't clear on that.
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly, one begins to twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to fit facts. Sherlock Holmes
I suppose you're right.
I
by wennejunk
I suppose you're right.
I guess it is code of sorts. However, since lay people traditionally communicate via lay-language, it would be more appropriate to drop the code and simply describe it accurately as the procedure in which:
'95% of the body delivered and then the infant is murdered by crushing its skull or sucking out its brains until it stops kicking'.
I think I'll start this approach from now on.
Thanks for moving me away from code language, I would hate to confuse other people.
If you go to the Planned Parenthood site today, they've turned the decision into a major fundraising event and choose words that make it sound like all abortions are now banned.
Donate now as Planned Parenthood mobilizes in response to the Supreme Court's reckless decision to uphold the federal abortion ban — a ban that tells women that politicians, not doctors, will make their health care decisions for them.
The leftie politicians don't even like to use the word "abortion" at all, preferring to talk about the more innocent-sounding "right to choose". Here's is Obama's official comment about yesterday's decision:
I strongly disagree with today's Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women. As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman's medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient. I am extremely concerned that this ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman's right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal law and a matter of equal rights for women.
John Edwards' official statement does not use the word "abortion" either.
"I could not disagree more strongly with today's Supreme Court decision. The ban upheld by the Court is an ill-considered and sweeping prohibition that does not even take account for serious threats to the health of individual women. This hard right turn is a stark reminder of why Democrats cannot afford to lose the 2008 election. Too much is at stake - starting with, as the Court made all too clear today, a woman's right to choose."
Hillary did an oops and let that word slip in, without even putting "so-called" in front of PBA. Some staffer blew it.
"This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman's right to choose and recognized the importance of women's health. Today's decision blatantly defies the Court's recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito."
That they have fundraisers
by jonlester
has been a frequent affront for many years when they clearly must have many nine figures in cashflow every year.
I try to never forget which high-profile performers participate in these events.
"many" is extraneous...
by jonlester
...I didn't go far enough with the backspace in my editing.
Amen, Yankee
by CroakerNorge
Look at the words:
"and I just gently draw the tissue out attempting to have an intact delivery, if possible.
That tissue is a baby, a viable, functioning human being.
“The surgeon removes the scissors and introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the skull contents."
The nurse had it right: he sucks the brains out of the baby.
May God have mercy upon us.
Part of the allure of PBA is
by wennejunk
Part of the allure of PBA is that there is a research market for intact fetuses.
I saw a price list at one time that detailed the various prices for body parts and then a premium for complete fetuses.
When you vacuum it into pieces or slice it into chunks, its not nearly as valuable.
I'll see if if I can find the references. It was several years ago and not internet material at the time.
Not the use but the sale.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
There's only one thing to say,
by Fausta
May God forgive us for this horrible crime.
Infanticide. History will treat abortionists
by Old Crow
similar to the Nazi 'doctors' in the camps.
====
"Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm." -- James Madison
I can't think of a more vivid description of evil
by Joliphant
Thoreau's insight is ever more apt
The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, etc. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs. Yet such as these even are commonly esteemed good citizens. Others, as most legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers, and office-holders, serve the state chiefly with their heads; and, as they rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God. A very few, as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the great sense, and men, serve the state with their consciences also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and they are commonly treated as enemies by it. A wise man will only be useful as a man, and will not submit to be "clay," and "stop a hole to keep the wind away," but leave that office to his dust at least
emphasis mine
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
They fool only themselves...
by Patricia C
To hang an ugly picture in a pretty frame does not change the ugliness of what's inside of it.. The left, in their attempt to hide their absence of morals, their disregard for human life and loathing for self, their country... or anything sacred, will stand upon their soap boxes and preach with righteous indignation of their promise to fight for their right to hate their president and their country and they will point fingers at "the other side" condemning the loss of those live who volunteered to die for their country yet demand they be given the right to kill the children they don't want.
Unfortunately, the left aren't even fooling themselves... and when they think no one is watching, the ugly picture in the pretty frame is revealed for what it is...
For example... Alec Baldwin claims to have been "so moved by a March 4 New York Times story about Pvt. Resha Kane's last day with family and friends before going for training to prepare for serving in Iraq", it called to mind how he might feel were that his own daughter, Ireland.
... and he had "his people" track down Resha Kane's mother so he could call her and tell her how important it is for people to "show support for the troops."
"Show" yes... "Really feel"?... not so much.
Baldwin keeps it no secret his protest of the war.
But... when he thought no one was looking... Baldwin's "ugly picture" regarding how he really feels about his daughter came to light
They had arranged a time for a phone call... But when Alec called, his daughter was not standing there to pick up the phone... So, he left a message instead...
Screaming, he told his "11... or 12" year old daughter... (he could not even recall her age)that she was a "rude, thoughtless little pig", informing her of his opinion that she doesn't, "have the brains or the decency as a human being..."
Even at 12, this father doesn't think his child has "the brains or the decency as a human being"...
Perhaps this sheds a bit of light on why they feel it's no big deal to suck the brains out of a baby, which they don't even consider to BE a human.
"Even when you fall on your face, you're still moving forward."
"...means is that the fetus, usually at a point where it is a he or a she and capable of living as a child outside the womb, is partially extracted from the mother's womb only to have his or her skull smashed and brains sucked out. "
One of the greatest hoaxes played on Amdericans is the idea of partial birth abortions and they being performed in the above described manner.
By the time in which a fetus is able to live outside the womb, it has turned around and is facing head first. The idea that the fetus is situated feet first is simply not true.
Really.
by Thomas
So if I understand you correctly, you are asserting that all children are naturally in position to be born headfirst, and that this turn comes of its own volition by the end of week 21.
Ever actually hang around any pregnant women?
-----------
We are all heroes, you and Boo and I. Hamsters and rangers everywhere, rejoice!
That is completely wrong...
by mggbraves
My wife is 34 1/2 weeks pregnant and our baby has not yet turned into the head-first position. According to our doctor, as well as half a dozen friends of ours who have given birth in the past year, that turn normally happens sometime around 36 weeks.
Get your facts straight before posting things like this and making yourself look like a fool.
One nation, in the courtrooms, with litigiousness and judicial activism for all.
Yes, it's that horrible. Do some research
by wennejunk
Umm. This is accurate and you are wrong.
Do some research. In the process of preparing for this, the abortionist (can't really say 'Doctor') uses his forceps to manuever the baby into a feet first position.
I still can't believe Justice Kennedy..
by cassie
..GOT it this time. As if he said, LOOK at this, LOOK at what they actually do in a D&E! I have come to expect the liberal and swing justices to *get beyond* the gruesome physicality of the thing.
I think they could find similar atrocities, albeit writ a little smaller, in second or even first term D&C's if they really want to look.
Do they?
Yeah. But...
by LibertarianHawk
...keep in mind that what they actually do in the procedure is, basically, irrelevant to the legal questions at hand.
Don't get me wrong, partial birth abortion is a horrifyingly barbaric procedure. And I think it's well served in the political debate about it that people know precisely what it is.
But the judges on the court aren't supposed to be involved in the political debate (which is one great reason why Roe should be stricken down...it forces the courts into a debate that ought to be political). As such, I was actually a little put off that he included that language in the opinion.
The law in question is either in keeping with constitutional boundaries or it isn't. How gruesome the procedure is has no bearing on that one way or another.
Justice Kennedy
by Adam C
FWIW, Justice Kennedy dissented in Stenberg when O'Connor and the 4 left judges overruled a PBA ban in Nebraska. Kennedy has been consistent in his belief that there is not a Constitutional Right to Partial Birth Abortion
______________________________________
Bobby Jindal Saves Louisiana
blog advertising is good for you
Human Events
Recent comments
I don't get it; why not hit him with this as well?
by Martin A. KnightYou have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. [n/t]
by Martin A. KnightI speak English ONLY. Period.
by SanDiego92108General, Forgive Us for Our Lack of Resolve
by Rod PatrickDone
by smagarSpecific Program for the Aged
by Rod PatrickSquandering People's Money
by Rod PatrickLIES OF THE DEVIL
by Rod PatrickMaybe not a Typical Politician
by MikeOYou haven't made your case, I'm afraid
by civil truthObama, c'est un poseur!
by streetwiseGore does claim the earth will be destroyed if
by streetwiseI appreciate it though
by Darin HNow that's a definition of genius. What an ear. n/t
by bantamwaitYes, but McCain's war, while genuinely heroic,
by bantamwaitA shorter way
by simpson316Good point, boychik!
by bantamwaitMass produced thin film
by moderichGotcha. Thanks.
by simpson316
blog advertising is good for you
get your job site
at simplyhired.com
Opponents of this law have been careful, from the moment the partial-birth abortion ban was enacted, to never refer to the disgusting procedure as "partial-birth abortion." Instead they have tried to sanitize the debate using code words, such as intact dilation and evacuation. Changing the vocabulary to use antiseptic terms doesn't change the reality that partial-birth abortions are gruesome late-term procedures, which at best resemble infanticide.